|
|
|
|
|
|
by B-Con
667 days ago
|
|
|
The industry predominately rewards writing code, not designing software. I think the results of bad code aren't as obvious. A bad bridge falls down, bad code has to be... refactored/replaced with more code? It goes from one text file that execs don't understand to a different text file that execs doesn't understand. And once something works, it becomes canon. Nothing is more permanent than a temporary hack that happens to work perfectly. But 1000 temporary hacks do not a well-engineered system make. I believe that maturing in software development is focusing on data and relationships over writing code. It's important to be able to turn it into code, but you should turn those into code, not turn code that works into a data model. |
|
|
The sad part of this is that code is absolutely a side-effect of design and conception: without a reason and reasonable approach, code shouldn't exist. I really think that the relative austerity happening in industry right now will shine a light on poor design: if your solution to solving poorly understood spaces was to add yet another layer of indirection in the form of a new "microservice" as the problem space changed over time, it's probably more likely that there was an inherent poor underlying understanding of the domain and lack of planning extensibility in anticipation. Essentially, code (bodies) and compute aren't as "cheap" as they were when money was free, so front-loading intelligent design and actually thinking about your space and it's use-cases becomes more and more important.